@Dennis Young The method you have described has been used by the political, economic, and educational organization established by the Koch Brothers and their fellow elites since 1975. They have succeeded. The Corporatist party with two wings now runs us. There now exists a class structure of the elites, those useful to the elites, and the consumption units from whom all wealth is to be extracted.by the elite with the backing of government policy.
I still believe this can be accomplished but not without many more people paying attention to what people like Harvey have to say. Patreon is a good start. Thank you
@@Gkuljian Still young collage students getting there understanding ideas of RDW and DH fast. The next really big project is to encourage them to influence their parents and grands. And finally to reach an ultra right following.
@@Gkuljian Still young collage students getting there understanding ideas of RDW and DH fast. The next really big project is to encourage them to influence their parents and grands. And finally to reach an ultra right following.
I love your work, David Harvey. You brilliantly lay out the economic landscape in clear terms nearly everyone can understand, even with no background in the field of study (not an easy task).
Very good video. I enjoy these videos and the others with Prof. Richard Wolff. We "know" what must be done. Educating the masses on the "what, how, and where" is the first step. Overcoming the political/institutional obstacles is the next step. Then implementation. At some point in time we better get it right, or else.
@@douglasphillips5870, "a little less conversation, and a little more action!" Yeah I feel ya! But it feels like trying to start an old engine that hasn't run in over 50 years! Not impossible, but not easy either.
Absolutely. Next is nationalization of the currency, as in the Lincoln Greenback. No more debt money loaned into circulation functioning in place of a real economy.
thank you professer Harvey. This is an absolutely savage analysis. I will need to study these trends and analyze the components of this movement of capital more. I hope sometime I can speak so incisively on this topic.
David - recently I challenged Richard's position on tariffs and questioned his true leanings towards what sounds like a "pro-free-trade" argument. I very much expected him to explain how protectionism is better and why - it's much more consistent with what he seems to believe. Can you do a piece comparing and contrasting free-trade/protectionism? It seems to me that when tariffs are used correctly, as designed and intended - the whole world's people will benefit more. Ie; Tariff what you can make and don't tariff what you can't or need. it's seems very simple and the water cycle of domestic cash flow isn't diverted like it is today. .
We have to realize that the M-C-M formula cannot be really applied anymore because most capital flow happens on the derivative markets these days which completely eliminates the commodity, so now it's more like M-M, money giving birth to more money directly, without all the production stuff in between (and I think Marx also predicted this in volume 3). This much has been clear since 2008. Which is why the question "where?" is more important, because classical production has been moved to India and China where we see the true industrial proletariat, and the West is pretty much inconsequential from the perspective of who is going to replace capitalism. Another thing is this needless categorization of different struggles, which can be easily dropped if we identify the common source in all of them, and that is private property. A production that does not involve private (or any other form of dictatorial) ownership includes, by definition, social reproduction as well (and automatically the satisfaction of all those humans wants and needs). After all, in a truly social economy workers make all decisions, and they'll produce only the stuff that they deem socially necessary, not what the absentee owners tell them to or what the struggle for market domination would dictate. A weaning off of capitalism is nothing less than a weaning off of the privilages that private property seduces with, which is why the revolution is much more likely to happen in the impoverished third world than in North America or Europe.
@@jonkjolstad Not sure about that, just think of the Naxalites of India, the Bolivarian project and Chavismo in Latin America, Kurdish anarchy etc. The problem is, that there is a deliberate total blackout in the media about them. For obvious reasons.
@@jonkjolstad And don't forget that Marx predicted the revolution to break out in industrial Germany, but instead it happened in the least likely of all places, feudal Russia.
This is a basic misunderstanding of Marx. M-C-M' still occurs, although it it outsourced to China, Vietnam and Bangladesh. The realationship a is not M-M as fictional capital can create no real value and is parasitic on real capital formation as rentier extraction. This is covered in n vol 3 of Das Capital, it is also described in 'Letters of blood & fire' and David Harvey's 'The condition of postmodernity'. Where profit's appear and where value is created is not the same thing this is partly why use value and exchange value which is not the same thing. This process is predicted in Marx, as Capatalism develops the rate of profit decreases, so capital investment moves from productive investment to unproductive rentier extraction via monopolies, and usery. This is what triggers the Minsky cycle of hedged to speculative to Ponzi finance creating a financial crisis via unpayable debt.
Unfortunately, many Liberals seem to believe that you can. And Conservatives don't believe in doing anything, just let the fabled 'Market' have its way.
@@john-lenin Exactly what I'm saying. So how do we stop participating in the constant self-violating and finally direct violence against the capitalists?
In politics in general I do favor geopolitics, and I have been looking for an analysis of socialist interests via the geographic perspective. David Harvey appears to have the answers I want
It is an insightful analysis and Mr Harvey makes it appear rather revolutionary. Yet we must remember that these "struggles" around production, realisation and reproduction are also the bread-and-butter issues of everyday politics. In fact, questions and conflicts around these issues in many ways for the basis of the actions of political parties, civil society organisations and government agencies. Generally speaking, western left-wing parties and even social democratic parties usually deal with all these three locations of capitalist struggles, bringing them together in more or less coherent and comprehensive political programs. So it's a little difficult to see the originality of the idea of combining those points into 'one single struggle'.
Martin Shkreli purchased the rights to market Daraprim from Impax Laboratories in August 2015. If he didn't do that, Impax Laboratories were going to stop manufacturing Deraprim, on the basis the "market" was too small. Deraprim was 100% covered by users insurance companies. If a user who needed the drug did not have an insurance policy to cover the cost, Turing Pharmaceuticals gave it to them for free. All they had to do was ask and Turing Pharmaceuticals sent it to them directly or to their Dr depending on what was easier for them. During the time congress was investigating Martin, literally, hundreds of other pharmaceutical products went up in price, thanks in great part to President Obama's deal with the pharmaceutical industry.
The solution is to communicate, ask the people what life they believe they would want if all was possible. If we all served/worked eight hours a day for mutual interests, all have a month or two off a year, share all luxury with mutual respect, surely humans could manage without money.
Elizabeth Taylor. I don't have a cell phone and this does not put me in real difficulty. It might be remembered here that cell phones have been shown to have long term effects of giving the person cancer. THIS is real difficulty. Thus I think one point of struggle should be the careful examination of all these needs and wants.
Since the market process serves highest bidders, the market inevitably prioritizes serving the wealthy, so it is also inevitable that neoliberalism and subjecting all things to market dynamics exacerbated developing a wealthy oligarchy, and exacerbated producing class stratification. Additional consequences are that poor people are useless to highest bidder markets, so wealthy people either abandon the poor (homeless), or subject them to the market dynamics of bottom-feeding business models. When you consider that those with extreme wealth develop a lack of empathy for others, manifest through pathologies such as hyper-individualism, sociopathy, and even psychopathy, it is no wonder that these neoliberal market dynamics and Eichmann tyrants of capital are capable of abusing the poor, and abusing the planet, while co-opting the concepts of liberty and freedom to justify their ideology, actions, and consequences. We now know that it takes four decades of neoliberalism to cancel the middle class social contract, and replace a secular democratic republic with Theo-conservative corporate-state fascism, kleptocracy, neo-feudalism, and debt peonage, governed by anti-science conservatives, sociopathic libertarians, and neo-con authoritarians. It seems quite clear that the market process through laissez faire capitalism is antithetical to the well-being of society, a secular democracy, and environmental sustainability. The stages of rolling neoliberalism back proceed through social democracy with comprehensive multilateral regulation, Keynesianism and responsibility to local communities, progressive marginal rate taxation, and ranked choice voting; but timely solutions would be better off with a direct democratization of the workplace and democratic socialism, if not directly moving to a post-capitalist mode of production such as The Zeitgeist Movement and a RBE (Resource-Based Economy).
The realization is a more effective method to begin with (in my opinion) because if you try to change things at the point of production you meet too much resistance due to the experience fighting communist movements and now technology is used to monitor workers so there is considerably less potential. It isn't going to be politically because 1 its too slow 2 it requires support by the general population. This is another place where there is a huge resistance and also organized suppression of ideological outliers
More than anything we need people out there educating, agitating and organizing. Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and YT comments sections are full of like-minded, strongly opinionated and well educated people when it comes to the struggle. But when I'm on the streets, at the shows, at demos and workshops, on campus or wherever trying to actually do the work to build the movement, very few are anywhere to be found. People love talking the talk but hate following it up with any action as if tweets and FB statuses will usher in the revolution. It's like they expect to be saved. But no party or relying on others to do the legwork will save us. We all gotta be all in. We've had multiple Vanguard parties come and go, multiple still around, the CPUSA turned 100 this year as well as Maoist and Trotskyist organizations, democratic socialist parties and organizations, countless anarchist groups and organizations and other left-wing parties and organizations that have been here putting in the effort but none of it's mattered because there's no mass movement behind any of it. There are a few centers of organizing where I live ranging from mainstream political activism on the campus to far-left circles on and off the local campuses and surrounding the music/art scene and based mainly outta the oldest infoshop and a few other used/radical book or music stores, venues and a couple of restaurants. There's some overlap but mostly the progressives and liberals do their thing and we do ours unless it's something big (Like when Spencer came here there was coordination). On our end it's mostly anarchists, Marxists, some MLs and a few Maoists along with a grip of other socialist tendencies, some permanent residents, some temporary like myself and others are students. No real division along ideological lines and literally everybody but rightists are welcome. We even have some top notch organizers who worked with groups like Organizing For America and bigger unions before moving way left. But we'll plan something out and send out invites and notifications to people who've been active at some point or visited the shops and joined the mailing list or Facebook groups, etc. Most don't bother responding and of the ones that do only half or so show up. But go look that their social media accounts and they're arguing with TERFs and fascists on Twitter, posting memes endlessly or otherwise being so toxic it's no wonder everybody thinks we're crazy and less than decent human beings, which was apparently so important they couldn't do a back to school drive for kids, canvasing or whatever was planned. The most active and effective people we have are the former reactionaries that work mostly on deradicalizing and bringing in people on the far right. All of the above ground work is open to the public to decide on, set up and do and done so using liquid democracy or another consensus building technique so it's not what or how things are being set up, it's the work itself that nobody seems willing to do. It's just a core group of us that keep it pushing and if we stopped it would just be the liberals and reactionaries in the city. I've been doing this since I was in my early teens and attended my first antifascist demonstration in NYC and after watching a bunch of Nazi skinheads ride past in their car cause they were too cowardly to get out and realizing we shut down their event I've done it ever since and in multiple states, in and outside of the joint, at multiple jobs and with a lotta demographics but at no point in my time has their been so many people openly advocating the things we work towards and so few actually involved. Nothing will ever change until people start to realize that this is not something to pick up to be a contrarian or to make friends online. It takes everyone putting everything on the line to push any kinda progress forward. Until then all we'll see is confused complaints and rationalizations about why we aren't winning. It's because we aren't really doing anything. Nothing can change that but us.
@@tigerstyle4505 I agree with a lot of what you said. In my campus in central Maryland, being a "leftist" is popular for the prestige of title rather than any real interest in revolutionary struggle. I am not convinced that the PSL, IWW, or SPUSA in Baltimore are on a revolutionary path.
I think that he missed a crucial site of struggle, which is the point of extraction of materials. We need to fight capitalism where they extract materials, assemble them into goods by alienating workers at the workplace, and reaping profits by gouging consumers at the marketplace.
it's important to understand these questions... however, History has never evolved in a "rational" way. The lords in Feudalism didn't want to loose their power in favor of the new capitalist class, how did that happen then? I am sure, the bourgeoisie didn't start thinking on non-feudal way to replace the feudal ways to produce, realize and social reproduce... however, the new ways where introduced and with the enough time, replace the old way... That is how should we proceed... let's say, push cooperative ownership of production means, replace the capitalis market, by a market between individuals AND those cooperatives... and so... it could take time? yes.. but I think it's better than trying to skip historical steps as happened with the USSR (that after 70 years, become a Capitalist country...)
Big G Haywood great point. But for the big pharma i wold add from my personal experience. I my case if the US did not had any doctors and fake medications at all our family would have had a way better life, with only one exclusion that unfortunately came very late and just prove my general point (got bless her). I agree with Noam Chomsky completely on the point of healthcare. Good food and clean water also in the ocean will be sufficient. And on top of this if we implement "What is to be done?" with all the psycho narcissists, corporate boards and major shareholders, removed from our backs, healthcare problem will correct itself to the point of almost extinction. And with reduction of healthcare cost we will have a multi pliers effect too. Call me a dumb dreamer. It is fine. And all pharma big or small, should nationalize on top of this all medical data has to be open source including, med science, trials planing and execution. As well all the medication of food has to be open. As always I would like to point here we got to reach a ultra right, fascist, and every body else etc.
This video was liked by o e to many people. And if u can't realize something you won't wrealislze the whole video and there is a potentialconfilicy para¶
$7.50 to $750 is "something like 5000% increase"???????? Clearly the result here would involve a factor of 10, so any answer which began with 5 would be clearly wrong. I guess geography doesn't require much math. $7.50 times 10, gets you $75, or 1000% x10, gets you $750 or 10,000%. This begins with a claim that capitalism or capitalist production is "driving us to environmental disaster"....... Marxism arose, largely in conjunction with "industrialization"......and this result was not anticipated, by Marx or Marxists.....although Malthus did, without needing "industrialization"....and the found his predictions derailed by it. ( and delayed slightly ) If you take, supply and demand, diminishing returns, and continual growth, with markets and with or without commodification, you have a system which can not deal with environmental limits......regardless of what system of production you adopt......to satisfy wants, needs and desires. Therefor Marxism is no more capable of dealing with these "factors" than any other "economic understanding"......that has had to deal with the basic elements initially listed. ( and since it tends to focus on the "increased population" caused by the industrialization" itself, which has increased by 700% since it's beginning, which has now reached these environmental limits.....it is neither capable of solving the problem nor mitigating the effects of "continual growth economics. " , which should not be a surprise, because it did not see the problem in the first place, and does not see it now......otherwise it would not claim to be anti-capitalist, but would have chosen the more appropriate anti-economic label. )
@@itzenormous Percentages are always fun......a half full or empty thing.....i.e. it's only half if you're coming back down......it's a 100% error if you're on the way up. Exponential errors are even worse.....plaguing both economists and climate change deniers.
It's appropriately named. Liberalism is an ideology born of capitalism that uses the capitalist model as its basis. Neoliberalism pushed this even further.
“What do we want? Incremental change! When do we want it? Someday!”
We must avoid inciting class war.
Someday, but NOT today! And NOT tomorrow either!
@@lynnwood7205 Class struggle is the momentous force of historical change
@@wtfhah you guys are going to disrupt humanity's rapid ascent out of misery
@Dennis Young The method you have described has been used by the political, economic, and educational organization established by the Koch Brothers and their fellow elites since 1975.
They have succeeded. The Corporatist party with two wings now runs us. There now exists a class structure of the elites, those useful to the elites, and the consumption units from whom all wealth is to be extracted.by the elite with the backing of government policy.
I still believe this can be accomplished but not without many more people paying attention to what people like Harvey have to say. Patreon is a good start. Thank you
Yes. The anti-commie indoctrination went a long way towards pushing people into believing capitalism is the only way to go.
@@Gkuljian Still young collage students getting there understanding ideas of RDW and DH fast. The next really big project is to encourage them to influence their parents and grands. And finally to reach an ultra right following.
@@Gkuljian Still young collage students getting there understanding ideas of RDW and DH fast. The next really big project is to encourage them to influence their parents and grands. And finally to reach an ultra right following.
I love your work, David Harvey. You brilliantly lay out the economic landscape in clear terms nearly everyone can understand, even with no background in the field of study (not an easy task).
Very good video. I enjoy these videos and the others with Prof. Richard Wolff. We "know" what must be done. Educating the masses on the "what, how, and where" is the first step. Overcoming the political/institutional obstacles is the next step. Then implementation. At some point in time we better get it right, or else.
The masses have cable and Marvel movies. Talking heads explain the really really complicated stuff to we good/they stupid.
@@lynnwood7205, yeah yeah... It's an uphill battle. To say the least. 😩
@@douglasphillips5870, "a little less conversation, and a little more action!" Yeah I feel ya! But it feels like trying to start an old engine that hasn't run in over 50 years! Not impossible, but not easy either.
Excellent talk, thanks
The first thing to aim for is the nationalization of land.
Absolutely. Next is nationalization of the currency, as in the Lincoln Greenback. No more debt money loaned into circulation functioning in place of a real economy.
This is going to take many guns. Really big guns.
Venezuela, here we come!
Very worthwhile!
thank you professer Harvey. This is an absolutely savage analysis. I will need to study these trends and analyze the components of this movement of capital more. I hope sometime I can speak so incisively on this topic.
Lovely clear discussion based on substance! Thankyou!
$7.50 a pill was already too expensive.
Thank You!
David - recently I challenged Richard's position on tariffs and questioned his true leanings towards what sounds like a "pro-free-trade" argument. I very much expected him to explain how protectionism is better and why - it's much more consistent with what he seems to believe. Can you do a piece comparing and contrasting free-trade/protectionism? It seems to me that when tariffs are used correctly, as designed and intended - the whole world's people will benefit more. Ie; Tariff what you can make and don't tariff what you can't or need. it's seems very simple and the water cycle of domestic cash flow isn't diverted like it is today. .
looking a bit tired Dave, not surprised with all the work you do, ,good on you mate,take it easy.
We have to realize that the M-C-M formula cannot be really applied anymore because most capital flow happens on the derivative markets these days which completely eliminates the commodity, so now it's more like M-M, money giving birth to more money directly, without all the production stuff in between (and I think Marx also predicted this in volume 3). This much has been clear since 2008. Which is why the question "where?" is more important, because classical production has been moved to India and China where we see the true industrial proletariat, and the West is pretty much inconsequential from the perspective of who is going to replace capitalism.
Another thing is this needless categorization of different struggles, which can be easily dropped if we identify the common source in all of them, and that is private property. A production that does not involve private (or any other form of dictatorial) ownership includes, by definition, social reproduction as well (and automatically the satisfaction of all those humans wants and needs). After all, in a truly social economy workers make all decisions, and they'll produce only the stuff that they deem socially necessary, not what the absentee owners tell them to or what the struggle for market domination would dictate. A weaning off of capitalism is nothing less than a weaning off of the privilages that private property seduces with, which is why the revolution is much more likely to happen in the impoverished third world than in North America or Europe.
One problem, though, is the tradition of revolution is rather absent in many parts of the Third World.
@@jonkjolstad Not sure about that, just think of the Naxalites of India, the Bolivarian project and Chavismo in Latin America, Kurdish anarchy etc. The problem is, that there is a deliberate total blackout in the media about them. For obvious reasons.
@@jonkjolstad And don't forget that Marx predicted the revolution to break out in industrial Germany, but instead it happened in the least likely of all places, feudal Russia.
@@billyoldman9209, I hope you're right.
This is a basic misunderstanding of Marx. M-C-M' still occurs, although it it outsourced to China, Vietnam and Bangladesh. The realationship a is not M-M as fictional capital can create no real value and is parasitic on real capital formation as rentier extraction. This is covered in n vol 3 of Das Capital, it is also described in 'Letters of blood & fire' and David Harvey's 'The condition of postmodernity'. Where profit's appear and where value is created is not the same thing this is partly why use value and exchange value which is not the same thing.
This process is predicted in Marx, as Capatalism develops the rate of profit decreases, so capital investment moves from productive investment to unproductive rentier extraction via monopolies, and usery.
This is what triggers the Minsky cycle of hedged to speculative to Ponzi finance creating a financial crisis via unpayable debt.
Awesome tube video
Superb tube video
No More War
You can’t be stupid enough to think that you can put a bandaid on Capitalism.
This is vulgar marxism at its best, minus the revolutionary eschatology, because nobody believes in violence anymore... except the bourgeoisie.
I wouldn't put money on it. lol
Billy OldMan Capitalism is violence.
Unfortunately, many Liberals seem to believe that you can. And Conservatives don't believe in doing anything, just let the fabled 'Market' have its way.
@@john-lenin Exactly what I'm saying. So how do we stop participating in the constant self-violating and finally direct violence against the capitalists?
In politics in general I do favor geopolitics, and I have been looking for an analysis of socialist interests via the geographic perspective. David Harvey appears to have the answers I want
Now It Is Liked
Remember.democracy
Cannot.work.without
Capitalism.
The major battle is between liberty vs. the common good. Pick your team people
Learn Socialist Justice liberty one hundred percent Wwg1wga
your liberty is my oppression
yes we should prevent humanity's ascension out of misery ua-cam.com/video/yCm9Ng0bbEQ/v-deo.html
That statement was a non-sequitor.
And it's not about *picking sides* - It is a matter of *education* (Oh... *Learned Soc Justice one.* )
@@scethabsent2745 The common good 100%
It is an insightful analysis and Mr Harvey makes it appear rather revolutionary. Yet we must remember that these "struggles" around production, realisation and reproduction are also the bread-and-butter issues of everyday politics. In fact, questions and conflicts around these issues in many ways for the basis of the actions of political parties, civil society organisations and government agencies. Generally speaking, western left-wing parties and even social democratic parties usually deal with all these three locations of capitalist struggles, bringing them together in more or less coherent and comprehensive political programs. So it's a little difficult to see the originality of the idea of combining those points into 'one single struggle'.
Martin Shkreli purchased the rights to market Daraprim from Impax Laboratories in August 2015. If he didn't do that, Impax Laboratories were going to stop manufacturing Deraprim, on the basis the "market" was too small.
Deraprim was 100% covered by users insurance companies. If a user who needed the drug did not have an insurance policy to cover the cost, Turing Pharmaceuticals gave it to them for free. All they had to do was ask and Turing Pharmaceuticals sent it to them directly or to their Dr depending on what was easier for them.
During the time congress was investigating Martin, literally, hundreds of other pharmaceutical products went up in price, thanks in great part to President Obama's deal with the pharmaceutical industry.
The solution is to communicate, ask the people what life they believe they would want if all was possible. If we all served/worked eight hours a day for mutual interests, all have a month or two off a year, share all luxury with mutual respect, surely humans could manage without money.
Elizabeth Taylor. I don't have a cell phone and this does not put me in real difficulty. It might be remembered here that cell phones have been shown to have long term effects of giving the person cancer. THIS is real difficulty. Thus I think one point of struggle should be the careful examination of all these needs and wants.
Since the market process serves highest bidders, the market inevitably prioritizes serving the wealthy, so it is also inevitable that neoliberalism and subjecting all things to market dynamics exacerbated developing a wealthy oligarchy, and exacerbated producing class stratification. Additional consequences are that poor people are useless to highest bidder markets, so wealthy people either abandon the poor (homeless), or subject them to the market dynamics of bottom-feeding business models. When you consider that those with extreme wealth develop a lack of empathy for others, manifest through pathologies such as hyper-individualism, sociopathy, and even psychopathy, it is no wonder that these neoliberal market dynamics and Eichmann tyrants of capital are capable of abusing the poor, and abusing the planet, while co-opting the concepts of liberty and freedom to justify their ideology, actions, and consequences.
We now know that it takes four decades of neoliberalism to cancel the middle class social contract, and replace a secular democratic republic with Theo-conservative corporate-state fascism, kleptocracy, neo-feudalism, and debt peonage, governed by anti-science conservatives, sociopathic libertarians, and neo-con authoritarians. It seems quite clear that the market process through laissez faire capitalism is antithetical to the well-being of society, a secular democracy, and environmental sustainability. The stages of rolling neoliberalism back proceed through social democracy with comprehensive multilateral regulation, Keynesianism and responsibility to local communities, progressive marginal rate taxation, and ranked choice voting; but timely solutions would be better off with a direct democratization of the workplace and democratic socialism, if not directly moving to a post-capitalist mode of production such as The Zeitgeist Movement and a RBE (Resource-Based Economy).
Who could tell me which anti-HIV drug Prof. David Harvey is referring to? I'd like to learn more about it. Thank you!
The realization is a more effective method to begin with (in my opinion) because if you try to change things at the point of production you meet too much resistance due to the experience fighting communist movements and now technology is used to monitor workers so there is considerably less potential. It isn't going to be politically because 1 its too slow 2 it requires support by the general population. This is another place where there is a huge resistance and also organized suppression of ideological outliers
We need a Marxist vanguard party.
More than anything we need people out there educating, agitating and organizing. Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and YT comments sections are full of like-minded, strongly opinionated and well educated people when it comes to the struggle. But when I'm on the streets, at the shows, at demos and workshops, on campus or wherever trying to actually do the work to build the movement, very few are anywhere to be found. People love talking the talk but hate following it up with any action as if tweets and FB statuses will usher in the revolution. It's like they expect to be saved. But no party or relying on others to do the legwork will save us. We all gotta be all in. We've had multiple Vanguard parties come and go, multiple still around, the CPUSA turned 100 this year as well as Maoist and Trotskyist organizations, democratic socialist parties and organizations, countless anarchist groups and organizations and other left-wing parties and organizations that have been here putting in the effort but none of it's mattered because there's no mass movement behind any of it.
There are a few centers of organizing where I live ranging from mainstream political activism on the campus to far-left circles on and off the local campuses and surrounding the music/art scene and based mainly outta the oldest infoshop and a few other used/radical book or music stores, venues and a couple of restaurants. There's some overlap but mostly the progressives and liberals do their thing and we do ours unless it's something big (Like when Spencer came here there was coordination). On our end it's mostly anarchists, Marxists, some MLs and a few Maoists along with a grip of other socialist tendencies, some permanent residents, some temporary like myself and others are students. No real division along ideological lines and literally everybody but rightists are welcome. We even have some top notch organizers who worked with groups like Organizing For America and bigger unions before moving way left.
But we'll plan something out and send out invites and notifications to people who've been active at some point or visited the shops and joined the mailing list or Facebook groups, etc. Most don't bother responding and of the ones that do only half or so show up. But go look that their social media accounts and they're arguing with TERFs and fascists on Twitter, posting memes endlessly or otherwise being so toxic it's no wonder everybody thinks we're crazy and less than decent human beings, which was apparently so important they couldn't do a back to school drive for kids, canvasing or whatever was planned. The most active and effective people we have are the former reactionaries that work mostly on deradicalizing and bringing in people on the far right.
All of the above ground work is open to the public to decide on, set up and do and done so using liquid democracy or another consensus building technique so it's not what or how things are being set up, it's the work itself that nobody seems willing to do. It's just a core group of us that keep it pushing and if we stopped it would just be the liberals and reactionaries in the city.
I've been doing this since I was in my early teens and attended my first antifascist demonstration in NYC and after watching a bunch of Nazi skinheads ride past in their car cause they were too cowardly to get out and realizing we shut down their event I've done it ever since and in multiple states, in and outside of the joint, at multiple jobs and with a lotta demographics but at no point in my time has their been so many people openly advocating the things we work towards and so few actually involved.
Nothing will ever change until people start to realize that this is not something to pick up to be a contrarian or to make friends online. It takes everyone putting everything on the line to push any kinda progress forward. Until then all we'll see is confused complaints and rationalizations about why we aren't winning. It's because we aren't really doing anything. Nothing can change that but us.
@@tigerstyle4505 I agree with a lot of what you said. In my campus in central Maryland, being a "leftist" is popular for the prestige of title rather than any real interest in revolutionary struggle. I am not convinced that the PSL, IWW, or SPUSA in Baltimore are on a revolutionary path.
Oh? How much does it cost, typically, to develop a drug and bring it to market in the US? Is it more (adjusted for inflation) than in 1955?
The problem of "Left-Unity" explained perfectly.
I think that he missed a crucial site of struggle, which is the point of extraction of materials. We need to fight capitalism where they extract materials, assemble them into goods by alienating workers at the workplace, and reaping profits by gouging consumers at the marketplace.
Very lucid
it's important to understand these questions... however, History has never evolved in a "rational" way. The lords in Feudalism didn't want to loose their power in favor of the new capitalist class, how did that happen then? I am sure, the bourgeoisie didn't start thinking on non-feudal way to replace the feudal ways to produce, realize and social reproduce... however, the new ways where introduced and with the enough time, replace the old way... That is how should we proceed... let's say, push cooperative ownership of production means, replace the capitalis market, by a market between individuals AND those cooperatives... and so... it could take time? yes.. but I think it's better than trying to skip historical steps as happened with the USSR (that after 70 years, become a Capitalist country...)
Is just my impression, or the song from thw beginning is the internationale?
Indeed it is, comrade. Indeed it is.
Big G Haywood great point. But for the big pharma i wold add from my personal experience. I my case if the US did not had any doctors and fake medications at all our family would have had a way better life, with only one exclusion that unfortunately came very late and just prove my general point (got bless her). I agree with Noam Chomsky completely on the point of healthcare. Good food and clean water also in the ocean will be sufficient. And on top of this if we implement "What is to be done?" with all the psycho narcissists, corporate boards and major shareholders, removed from our backs, healthcare problem will correct itself to the point of almost extinction. And with reduction of healthcare cost we will have a multi pliers effect too. Call me a dumb dreamer. It is fine. And all pharma big or small, should nationalize on top of this all medical data has to be open source including, med science, trials planing and execution. As well all the medication of food has to be open.
As always I would like to point here we got to reach a ultra right, fascist, and every body else etc.
The human condition precludes: peace, equality and freedom. The best you can get is what you have in the historical moment . Discuss
things are rapidly improving globally under capitalism. we can do better and we are
So the answer is:" We need to find ways how to do it." Yeah... this is... sobering. Are you sure, that you are sober enough, too, Mr. Harvey?
Which way do you suggest, the carrot or the stick ?
US OPEN 2013
chto delat Lenin
This video was liked by o e to many people. And if u can't realize something you won't wrealislze the whole video and there is a potentialconfilicy para¶
Say what? Can you repeat that in english please?
@@Deebz270 fine unplug mouse plug in keyboard What ?> i meant hi lol
no. no i wont i am omni lingus sorry u so dumb
V
2TAB TAB
$7.50 to $750 is "something like 5000% increase"???????? Clearly the result here would involve a factor of 10,
so any answer which began with 5 would be clearly wrong. I guess geography doesn't require much math.
$7.50 times 10, gets you $75, or 1000% x10, gets you $750 or 10,000%.
This begins with a claim that capitalism or capitalist production is "driving us to environmental disaster".......
Marxism arose, largely in conjunction with "industrialization"......and this result was not anticipated, by
Marx or Marxists.....although Malthus did, without needing "industrialization"....and the found his predictions
derailed by it. ( and delayed slightly )
If you take, supply and demand, diminishing returns, and continual growth, with markets and with or without
commodification, you have a system which can not deal with environmental limits......regardless of what
system of production you adopt......to satisfy wants, needs and desires. Therefor Marxism is no more
capable of dealing with these "factors" than any other "economic understanding"......that has had to deal
with the basic elements initially listed. ( and since it tends to focus on the "increased population" caused
by the industrialization" itself, which has increased by 700% since it's beginning, which has now reached
these environmental limits.....it is neither capable of solving the problem nor mitigating the effects of
"continual growth economics. " , which should not be a surprise, because it did not see the problem in
the first place, and does not see it now......otherwise it would not claim to be anti-capitalist, but would
have chosen the more appropriate anti-economic label. )
Well, he was off by a margin of half.
His estimate was conservative, to say the least.
@@itzenormous Percentages are always fun......a half full or empty thing.....i.e. it's only half
if you're coming back down......it's a 100% error if you're on the way up. Exponential errors
are even worse.....plaguing both economists and climate change deniers.
This series is malnamed. It should be called the anti-liberal (free market/economic freedom) chronicles
your 'free' market is my monopoly
It's appropriately named. Liberalism is an ideology born of capitalism that uses the capitalist model as its basis. Neoliberalism pushed this even further.
@@bryanpinamonti9322 Capitalism was born by liberalism and there is no mode of capitalist production but there is a liberal mode of governance.
@@PoliticalEconomy101 'There is no mode of capitalist production'?! You must be a troll.